Origin and use

Freedom in the World was launched in 1973 by Raymond Gastil. It produces annual scores representing the levels of political rights and civil liberties in each state and territory, on a scale from 1 (most free) to 7 (least free). Depending on the ratings, the nations are then classified as "Free", "Part(ial)ly Free", or "Not Free".[6] The report is often used by researchers in order to measure democracy and correlates highly with several other measures of democracy such as the Polity data series.[7]

Country rankings

The rankings below are from the Freedom in the World 2010,[9] 2011,[10] 2012,[11] 2013,[12] 2014,[13] 2015,[14] 2016,[15] 2017[16], 2018[17], and 2019[18] surveys, each reflecting findings covering the previous year. Each pair of political rights and civil liberties ratings is averaged to determine an overall status of "Free" (1.0–2.5), "Part(ial)ly Free" (3.0–5.0), or "Not Free" (5.5–7.0).[19]

An asterisk (*) indicates countries which are "electoral democracies". To qualify as an "electoral democracy", a state must have satisfied the following criteria:

A competitive, multiparty political system;

Adult suffrage for all citizens without criminal convictions (some states may further punish and subjugate people with criminal convictions by disenfranchising them from the democratic process);

Regularly contested elections conducted in conditions of ballot secrecy, reasonable ballot security, and the absence of massive voter fraud that yields results that are unrepresentative of the public will; and

Significant public access of major political parties to the electorate through the media and through generally open political campaigning.

An electoral democracy must have a score of 7 or more out of 12 in political rights subcategory A (Electoral Progress), an overall aggregate score of 20 in their political rights rating and an overall aggregate score of 30 in their civil liberties rating.[20]

Freedom House's term "electoral democracy" differs from "liberal democracy" in that the latter also implies the presence of a substantial array of civil liberties. In the survey, all Free countries qualify as both electoral and liberal democracies. By contrast, some Partly Free countries qualify as electoral, but not liberal, democracies.[19]

Trends

According to Freedom House, a quarter of all declines of freedom in the world in 2016 took place in Europe.[22]

Percentage of countries in each category, from the 1973 through 2014 reports:

1973–2014

Not Free Partly Free Free

Year

Free

PartlyFree

NotFree

ElectoralDemocracies

1975

41 (27%)

48 (32%)

63 (41%)

—

1980

51 (32%)

54 (33%)

56 (35%)

—

1985

53 (32%)

59 (35%)

55 (33%)

—

1990

61 (37%)

44 (26%)

62 (37%)

69 (41%)

1995

76 (40%)

61 (32%)

54 (28%)

113 (59%)

2000

85 (44%)

60 (31%)

47 (25%)

120 (63%)

2005

89 (46%)

54 (28%)

49 (26%)

119 (62%)

2010

89 (46%)

58 (30%)

47 (24%)

116 (60%)

2011

87 (45%)

60 (31%)

47 (24%)

115 (59%)

2012

87 (45%)

60 (31%)

48 (25%)

117 (60%)

2013

90 (46%)

58 (30%)

47 (24%)

117 (60%)

2014

88 (45%)

59 (30%)

48 (25%)

122 (63%)

2015

89 (46%)

55 (28%)

51 (26%)

125 (64%)

2016

86 (44%)

59 (30%)

50 (26%)

125 (64%)

2017

87 (45%)

59 (30%)

49 (25%)

123 (63%)

Sources: Country Status and ratings overview 1973–2016,[23] Number and percentages of electoral democracies 1989–2016,[24]Freedom in the World 2018 report covering 2017.[25]

Notes:

The years shown in the map and table above are the year the survey was released, the data shown covers the prior calendar year.

The chart and table above do not include data for related/disputed territories.

Evaluation

There is some debate over the neutrality of Freedom House and the methodology used for the Freedom in the World report, which has been written by Raymond D. Gastil and his colleagues.[6] The neutrality and biases of human-rights indices have been discussed in several publications by Kenneth A. Bollen.[26] Bollen wrote that "Considered together these criticisms suggest that some nations may have been incorrectly rated on Gastil's measures. However, none of the criticisms have demonstrated a systematic bias in all the ratings. Most of the evidence consists of anecdotal evidence of relatively few cases. Whether there is a systematic or sporadic slant in Gastil's ratings is an open question" (Bollen, 1986, p. 586).[6] The freedom index of Freedom in the World has a very strong and positive (at least an 80%) correlation with three other democracy-indices studied in Mainwaring (2001, p. 53).[27]

Ideological bias or neutrality

In his 1986 study, Bollen discussed reviews of measurements of human rights, including the index reported in Freedom in the World (Bollen, 1986, p. 585). Criticisms of Freedom in the World during the 1980s were discussed by Gastil (1990), who stated that "generally such criticism is based on opinions about Freedom House rather than detailed examination of survey ratings", a conclusion disputed by Giannone.[28] The definition of Freedom in Gastil (1982) and Freedom House (1990) emphasized liberties rather than the exercise of freedom, according to Adam Przeworski, who gave the following example: In the United States, citizens are free to form political parties and to vote, yet even in presidential elections only half of U.S. "citizens" vote; in the U.S., "the same two parties speak in a commercially sponsored unison", wrote Przeworski (2003, p. 277).[8]

More recent charges of ideological bias prompted Freedom House to issue this 2010 statement:

Freedom House does not maintain a culture-bound view of freedom. The methodology of the survey is grounded in basic standards of political rights and civil liberties, derived in large measure from relevant portions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. These standards apply to all countries and territories, irrespective of geographical location, ethnic or religious composition, or level of economic development.[19]

Mainwaring et alia (2001, p. 52)[27] wrote that Freedom House's index had "two systematic biases: scores for leftist were tainted by political considerations, and changes in scores are sometimes driven by changes in their criteria rather than changes in real conditions." Nonetheless, when evaluated in Latin American countries yearly, Freedom House's index was very strongly and positively correlated with the index of Adam Przeworski and with the index of the authors themselves: They evaluated Pearson's coefficient of linear correlation between their index and Freedom House's index, which was 0.82; among these indices and the two others studied, the correlations were all between 0.80 and 0.86 (Mainwaring et alia, 2001, p. 53).[27]

As previously quoted, Bollen criticized previous studies of Freedom in the World as anecdotal and inconclusive; they raised issues needing further study by scientific methods rather than anecdotes.[6] Bollen studied the question of ideological bias using multivariate statistics. Using their factor-analyticmodel for human-rights measurements, Bollen and Paxton estimate that Gastil's method produces a bias of -0.38 standard deviations (s.d.) against Marxist–Leninist countries and a larger bias, +0.5 s.d., favoring Christian countries; similar results held for the methodology of Sussman (Bollen and Paxton, 2000, p. 585).[29] In contrast, another method by a critic of Freedom in the World produced a bias for Leftist countries during the 1980s of at least +0.8 s.d., a bias that is "consistent with the general finding that political scientists are more favorable to leftist politics than is the general population" (Bollen and Paxton, p. 585).[29]

Use and conceptual analysis

Criticisms of the reception and uses of the Freedom in the World report have been noted by Diego Giannone:[30]

"Conceptual stretching", Giovanni Sartori's critical term for a methodological shortcoming common in social studies.[31] Giannone reports as an example that, according to Landman and Hausermann (2003), "the index by FH has been used as a tool for measuring democracy, good governance, and human rights, thus producing a conceptual stretching which is a major cause of 'losses in connotative precision': in short, an instrument used to measure everything, in the end, is not able to discriminate against anything."[32]

Issues with aggregation. Giannone quotes Scoble and Wiseberg's conclusion (1981) that "the sum of a civil liberty score of 4 and a political liberty score of 2 is the same as the sum of a civil liberty score of 2 and a political liberty score of 4 even though the substantive interpretation of these different combinations is different."[33]

"Lack of specificity and rigorousness in construction" and "inadequate level of transparency and replicability of the scales", the first referencing to Scoble et alie (1981) and the latter to Hadenius and Teorell (2005).[34] In support of the latter, he also quotes the conclusion of Munck and Verkuilen (2002) that "the aggregate data offered by Freedom House has to be accepted largely on faith",[35] due to the factors that "no set of coding rules is provided, and the sources of information are not identified with enough precision, and because disaggregated data have not been made available to independent scholars".[34]

Time series

In "Political and ideological aspects in the measurement of democracy: the Freedom House case" (2010) which reviewed changes to the methodology since 1990, Diego Giannone concluded that "because of the changes in methodology over time and the strict interconnection between methodological and political aspects, the FH data do not offer an unbroken and politically neutral time series, such that they should not be used for cross-time analyses even for the development of first hypotheses. The internal consistency of the data series is open to question."[36]

On this topic, the Freedom House website replies that they have "made a number of modest methodological changes to adapt to evolving ideas about political rights and civil liberties. At the same time, the time series data are not revised retroactively, and any changes to the methodology are introduced incrementally in order to ensure the comparability of the ratings from year to year."[19]

^Freedom House (2017). Freedom in the World, 2017(PDF). Freedom House. p. 1. Archived from the original on 27 July 2017. Retrieved 27 July 2017. [N]early one-quarter of the countries registering declines in 2016 were in Europe.CS1 maint: BOT: original-url status unknown (link)

^Bollen has held chairs as a Distinguished Professor of Sociology and the Director of the Howard W. Odum Institute for Research in Social Science at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC-CH). Also serving as an Adjunct Professor of Statistics at UNC-CH, Bollen wrote the leading graduate textbook in structural equation models (SEM), often called LISREL models; SEM modeling allows the summary of a large number of measurements using a small number of meaningful factors. SEM was used by Bollen in the studies reported hereafter.

The Eritrean–Ethiopian War ended with the signing of the Algiers Agreement on December 12, 2000. In 2002, in an effort to mitigate the effects of the prolonged stalemate with Ethiopia, the President's Administration created the Wefri Warsay Yika'alo. It is a comprehensive, revolutionary, national economic rehabilitation and development program in the aftermath of the destructive war with Ethiopia. Due to his frustration with the stalemated peace process with Ethiopia, the President of Eritrea Isaias Afewerki wrote a series of Eleven Letters to the UN Security Council and Secretary-General Kofi Annan. Despite the Algiers Agreement, tense relations with Ethiopia have continued and led to regional instability.

His government has also been condemned for allegedly arming and financing the insurgency in Somalia; the United States is considering labeling Eritrea a "State Sponsor of Terrorism," however, many experts on the topic have shied from this assertion, stating that "If there is one country where the fighting of extremists and terrorists was a priority when it mattered, it was Eritrea." This accusation has also been labeled a reckless move by others.In December 2007, an estimated 4000 Eritrean troops remained in the 'demilitarized zone' with a further 120,000 along its side of the border. Ethiopia maintained 100,000 troops along its side.Under Afewerki's rule, Eritrea has had one of the worst rates of press freedom in the world, and since 2007, the worst.

Authoritarianism is a form of government characterized by strong central power and limited political freedoms. Under an authoritarian regime, individual freedoms are subordinate to the state, and there is no constitutional accountability and no rule of law. Authoritarian regimes can be autocratic, with power concentrated in one person, or can be a committee, with power shared among officials and government institutions. The political scientist Juan Linz synthesized authoritarian political systems as possessing four qualities:

Limited political pluralism, realized with legalistic constraints on the legislature, political parties, and interest groups;

Political legitimacy based upon appeals to emotion, and identification of the regime as a necessary evil to combat enemies of the people, socio-economic underdevelopment, and guerrilla insurgency;

Minimal social mobilization consequent to legalistic constraints, such as political suppression of all anti-regime activities;

Informally defined executive powers, which extend and allow government authority into every sphere of life.

Censorship is a long term issue in Malaysia which has become more apparent as it attempts to adapt to a modern knowledge-based economy. Despite having in its Federal Constitution states that subject to certain conditions, “every citizen has the right to freedom of speech and expression” (Article 10), Malaysia has consistently sat low on global indexes related to press and media freedom.

In 2016, Malaysia was ranked 146th (out of 180) in the Worldwide Press Freedom Index by Reporters Without Borders. It was also given a "Partly Free" status on the Freedom in the World report by Freedom House in 2008 and remains so in 2016. On the Freedom in the World index, graded on a scale of one to seven, with one being the most free and seven being the least, Malaysia obtained four points for both political rights and civil liberties.Unlicensed use or possession of a printing press is illegal under the Printing Presses and Publications Act of 1984. Journalists are frequently given guidelines by the Prime Minister's Office when reporting 'sensitive' issues, and media self-censorship is encouraged.

Corruption remains a serious problem for doing business in Nicaragua. Transparency International's 2017 Corruption Perception Index ranks the country 151st place out of 180 countries. According to Freedom House, since the election of Daniel Ortega in 2006, corruption had increased in Nicaragua.

Freedom House is a U.S.-based 501(c)(3) U.S. government-funded non-governmental organization (NGO) that conducts research and advocacy on democracy, political freedom, and human rights. Freedom House was founded in October 1941, and Wendell Willkie and Eleanor Roosevelt served as its first honorary chairpersons.

It describes itself as a "clear voice for democracy and freedom around the world", although critics have stated that the organization is biased towards US interests. The organization was 66% funded by grants from the U.S. government in 2006, a number which has increased to 86% in 2016. The reliance on US funding has been acknowledged as "a problem" within Freedom House, but accepted as a "necessary evil".The organization's annual Freedom in the World report, which assesses each country's degree of political freedoms and civil liberties, is frequently cited by political scientists, journalists, and policymakers. Freedom of the Press and Freedom of the Net, which monitor censorship, intimidation and violence against journalists, and public access to information, are among its other signature reports.

Human rights in Botswana are protected under the constitution. The 2009 Human Rights Report by the United States Department of State noted that in general the government of Botswana has respected the rights of its citizens.

Human rights in Burkina Faso are addressed in the constitution. The 2009 Human Rights Report by the United States Department of State noted concerns regarding restrictions on the press and the operation of the judiciary system.

Human rights in Cameroon are addressed in the constitution. However, the 2009 Human Rights Report by the United States Department of State noted concerns in regard to election irregularities, security forces torture and arbitrary arrests.

Human rights in Cape Verde are addressed under the national constitution.

The 2009 Human Rights Report by the United States Department of State noted that in general, the government respected the basic rights of citizens, however there were concerns in certain areas such as prison conditions, legal process and discrimination.

The issue of human rights in Djibouti, a small country situated within the Horn of Africa, is a matter of concern for several human rights organizations. In its 2011 Freedom in the World report, Freedom House ranked Djibouti as "Not Free", a downgrading from its former status as "Partly Free". The nation most recently saw martial violence in 2008, in the form of border clashes with neighbouring Eritrea.

Human rights in Guinea, a nation of approximately 10,069,000 people in West Africa, are a contentious issue. In its 2012 Freedom in the World report, Freedom House named Guinea "partly free" for the second year in a row, an improvement over its former status as one of the least free countries in Africa.The United States Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, which produces annual human rights reports on the country, claims the most pressing human rights issues are the use of torture by security forces, and abuse of women and children through such acts as female genital mutilation.

The government in Singapore has broad powers to limit citizens' rights and to inhibit political opposition. In 2018, Singapore was ranked 151st out of 180 nations by Reporters Without Borders in the Worldwide Press Freedom Index. Freedom in the World scored Singapore 4 out of 7 for political freedom, and 4 out of 7 for civil liberties (where 1 is the most free), with an overall ranking of "partly free" for the year 2015.

The U.S. Department of State's Country Report on Human Rights Practices for São Tomé and Príncipe states that the government generally respects the human rights of its citizens, despite problems in a few areas.

São Tomé and Príncipe is one of 11 sub-Saharan African countries rated "free" in the 2006 Freedom in the World survey published annually by Freedom House, a pro-democracy organization that monitors political rights, civil liberties, and press freedom around the world. On a scale from 1 (most free) to 7 (least free), São Tomé received a 2 for both political rights and civil liberties.

Human rights in Zambia are addressed in the constitution. However, the Country Report on Human Rights Practices in Zambia for 2012 by the United States Department of State noted that in general, the government's human rights record remained poor.

Human rights in the Gambia have been considered poor under Yahya Jammeh. In December, 2016, he lost an election to Adama Barrow, who promised to improve human rights in his country. The "Freedom in the World" report for 2018 ranked the Gambia as "partly free". LGBT activity was illegal, and punishable with life imprisonment.

Human rights in the Maldives, an archipelagic nation of 417,000 people off the coast of the Indian Subcontinent, is a contentious issue. In its 2011 Freedom in the World report, Freedom House declared the Maldives "Partly Free", claiming a reform process which had made headway in 2009 and 2010 had stalled. The United States Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor claims in their 2012 report on human rights practices in the country that the most significant problems are corruption, lack of religious freedom, and abuse and unequal treatment of women.

This article contains a list of freedom indices produced by several non-governmental organizations that publish and maintain assessments of the state of freedom in the world, according to their own various definitions of the term, and rank countries as being free, partly free, or using various measures of freedom, including civil liberties, political rights and economic rights.

Kuwait is a constitutional emirate with a semi-democratic political system. The hybrid political system is divided between an elected parliament and appointed government.Kuwait is among the Middle East's freest countries in civil liberties and political rights. The Constitution of Kuwait was promulgated in 1962. Freedom House rates the country as "Partly Free" in the Freedom in the World survey. Kuwait is the only one among the Arab states of the Persian Gulf which is ranked "partly free".

This page is based on a Wikipedia article written by authors
(here).
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.